Can masjids and laboratories co-exist?

Yes, isolating science and religion is one way of doing things. But what if one is a believer of both? Is it necessary to pick sides? DESIGN: ERUM SHAIKH/ZAHRA PEER MOHAMMED

At a small gathering of students and science enthusiasts in Karachi, Pervez Hoodbhoy was asked why he lost his temper at Agha Waqar- the scientist who claims he can successfully run a car engine on water.

Dr Pervez Hoodbhoy responded that nothing irked him more than bad physics. He went on to say that we had become so disgruntled as a society, that we were constantly looking for short cuts and miracles to solve our problems. And he was completely justified in making that claim. Very few, if any can question Dr Hoodbhoy’s work and consequentially his authority on the subject.

He later made a statement saying that science and religion cannot go together. If both were allowed to function in isolation, without constantly seeking Divine truths in science and vice versa, it would save our society a lot of trouble. To me, that seemed like a short cut in understanding religion.

The debate between the incompatibility of science and religion is not a new one. And it is certainly not an easy one either. There are extremes. One extreme believes in discarding everything, which cannot be explained by religious principles and truths. The other extreme believes in discarding everything that cannot be explained by logic, reason and a scientific method. Both these extremes are becoming increasingly prevalent because extremes are easy. What we tend to forget is that, they are also exclusionary of other viewpoints. It is finding a middle ground, a meeting point between faith and logic, a union of miracle and discovery, a consensus of science and theology, which is the main challenge in our society. It is unfortunately also missing from our academic and public discourse.

Yes, isolating science and religion is one way of doing things. But what if one is a believer of both? Is it necessary to pick sides?

One look at Islamic history will tell you otherwise. In the words of the famous scholar Ziauddin Sardar, “Muslims have been on the verge of physical, cultural and intellectual extinction simply because they have allowed parochialism and traditionalism to rule their minds.” The solution he suggests is to break free from the ‘ghetto mentality.’ The problem with our society today is just that - we have lost the courage or spirit to extract the real essence of Islam from the version that we see being practised around us today. We shun the ‘West’ and their methods but at the same time have become lazy and unwilling to form our own unique world-view. A world-view that allows us to evolve, to look ahead and embrace the challenges of the modern world without loosing grips on our history and Islamic principles.

Instead we turn to quick fixes and easy solutions. We dabble between extremism and escapism.

Unfortunately, a look at our history will tell you that it has not helped us become better at neither religion nor science. Not only has Muslim civilization watched from the sidelines while the rest of the world made exponential progress in scientific realms, we have also lost the essence of our religion to militants and extremists who have now become the poster-children of Muslim identity globally. In this tug of war between the ‘Islamists’ and the ‘liberals’, we have forgone the opportunity to produce thousands of potential Ibn-e-Sinas.

Something needs to be done to end this polarisation of faith and reason, which begins at academics and eventually seeps into every aspect of our lives. Something needs to be done soon before the path to the masjid and the path to laboratories become mutually exclusive of each other. And the first step towards achieving that would be to stop propagating and endorsing short cuts in both science and religion.

For you to postulate that science is an ‘extreme’ end of an intolerance spectrum with religion on the other end is therefore invalid.

This can be tested and proven, thus rendering the main argument of your blog moot.

And yes, the reason why science appears intolerant to non-scientists is because they do not understand the scientific method. Also because in science, there is no such thing as absolute relativism – if you think science is extreme and intolerant in its views, jump off a building and try to find a moderate path to the theory of gravity (and yes, its a theory, go look that up).

Religion and science are two opposite things.Science demands an open mind that is not averse to new possibilities,that does not shut off doubt and rational thought.A religious mind is not a questioning,truth seeking mind,it accepts unquestioningly what’s given in the scripture.Recommend

Science relies on evidence,rational thinking & proof.Religion does the opposite and demands blind belief and ostracizes those having doubts.Scientists are always open to new explanations for different things.Religious ppl on the other hand violently oppose anything contradictory to their beliefs.
Science and religion are incompatible.Recommend

shuja ul islam

why somebody would even ask this questions in the first place…because it very very tough..!!

Now science needs justification from the bloggers who don’t even understand how science proceeds?Strange………….Recommend

http://www.ahmadhammad.com Ahmad Hammad

Well, I believe, we shouldn’t bracket all religions under the title of Religion. There are certain religions which are socially scientific. Others are psychologically scientific. However, Islam gave rise to Positivism; as positivism has been described by Weber.

To Iqbal, the era of Science starts in its truest sense from the revelation of the Quran. You may disagree, however, there are historical evidences of this claim. Iqbal in his Reconstruction has provided such evidences with confidence……Recommend

shahroz khurshd

Well, Masjids and laboratories can ONLY co-exist……….

Only With proper scientific knowledge, one can almost fully understand “the Signs”, Almighty Allah has described in THE QUR’AN of His existence.

a common man can get just an idea that creation of human in mother womb is described in the Qur’an, but only an embryologist do realize that every single step described above occurs in the same manner in every fetus……

There are almost six thousand signs described 1400 years ago revealed to prophet Muhammad (S.A.W), and now-a-days, with peak scientific knowledge and modern techniques, these facts are being proven.
Islam and science are perfectly complementary.Recommend

Iqbal

The reason why we as a ‘society’ have regressed is because we take religion waaaay too seriously. It all starts and ends with the Quraan. Why are we here, what will happen after death, what is the purpose of life, is there life on other planets…my own very educated family has stopped wondering about such questions because every answer has apparently been sent by God and all we have to do now is worship Him and get that ticket to heaven. Piece-a-cake!
And the reason for this unhealthy attitude? Religion is no longer taken as a personal belief. One’s belief in this country has to be stated out loud so that we can be put into categories (Shia, Sunni, Ahmedi…) and that my friends is the end of personal growth and the beginning of social conformity.
I must say though, that I’ve heard some rather fascinating and (believe it or not) scientific approaches to Islam. It takes courage to give religion a chance once one moves away/sees the dark side;) I do however believe that science and religion can work together.Recommend

http://lonepkliberal.wordpress.com Loneliberal PK

Ahmed,

I’m not sure if you realize what positivism is. Positivism is the mortal enemy of “faith”.

It implies that nothing exists unless it has been confirmed directly by sensory experience (for which a pre-existing natural explanation isn’t there) or proven mathematically. This is in contradiction to any ideology that requires belief in the “ghayab” (unobservable).

Also, if true science began with the advent of Islam, why did the scientific surge end with the golden age even though the Muslim world itself continued to survive, and thrive? It indicates that this surge had little to do with religion itself, and more to do with the free-thinking individuals and healthy socioeconomic conditions marking that era.Recommend

Saima

What has Agha waqqar’s car got to do with religion? Religion may be unquestionable faith but it is not stupid……or irrational, like a car run by water. Anyone who has studied basic engineering can identify that. And as far as religion is concerned, why are we looking at only one aspect of it…..the miracles??? Miracles are based one faith but are very rare…..and divine, stuff that mere human beings cannot do. Miracles by humans are superstitions……not religion.Recommend

http://www.kabacreations.com Vishnu Dutta

Labs can exist and work freely if Masjid alllows them to, but it is not vice versa.

“Both these extremes are becoming increasingly prevalent because extremes are easy. What we tend to forget is that, they are also exclusionary of other viewpoints. It is finding a middle ground, a meeting point between faith and logic..”

Are you saying Logic should be diluted to meet the boundaries of, basically, fiction that is Religious in nature?

If you believe so then why do you take medicines which are tested on animals which similar gene structure to humans,which actually proves Evolution and disproves whatever Islam has to say on the matter?

You choose to ignore it because it is convenient to you.

You are saying Fiction deserves to be equated with Science!!!! Can Shakespere be compared to Einstein? The difference between them is the difference between Islam(or for that matter any Religion) and Science.Recommend

Rameez Ahmad

i have to agree with hoohbhoy religion and science are entirely different, religion deals with spiritual guidance, concept of heaven, hell nirvana, rebirth all aimed at motivating man to take the moral course of action, science on the other hand is for better understanding our surrounding physical world.
Religion may overlap with science in areas like divine signs that we so seek to prove true as if its our last chance to prove the validity and truthfulness of our religions especially Islam, but Islam is far more than that, Islam does not require empirical evidence to safeguard its existence and neither science when overlaps into defining our very existence or points towards atheism does a very great job at explaining questions of spirituality and our existence.
Better both to be used for their own purposes and whenever they are mixed together we end us messing both of them. Recommend

http://tribune.com p r sharma

Religion forbids asking questions and requires complete submission.
This is exactly just opposite in regard to science which invariably raises questions, doubts , tests and then accepts. Theory of science will give the same result uniformly without any variation even if tested umpteen times.

Author wants to stick with religion and wants a middle path where science and religion can meet. There is no word like compromise in the vocabulary of science. No deviation .
Pakistan is probably the only place where even moderate minds are obsessed with religion and try to link religion with science and hence such blog surfaces.Recommend

Moz

@shahroz khurshd:

What about theory of evolution? does Islam justify that too!!! Science is not dictated by Islam. I don’t believe that any man can travel on a horse faster than the speed of light and converse with god without anybody witnessing the event. I don’t believe that any man can split the moon in half. And no I don’t believe some guy 1000s of years ago ate a forbidden fruit and that is why we are on earth. Religion has no logic, rationality, open thinking. It is not compatible with Islam or for that matter any other religion. Recommend

Parvez

Read the title and said ‘ Oh not another science versus religion dastan’, but then I kept reading and could not stop. Your view on what the Islamic world has done both to science and to religion needs to be repeated many a time.
On the conflict between science and religion, if I remember my history correctly what is happening in the Islamic world today has already happened in the 1600 – 1700 in the Christian world and they have evolved. We instead of learning anything are trudging the same path and evolving for the better, seems a long, long way away.
Today for us the pragmatic, doable answer not necessarily the correct one, is to keep both separate. Recommend

http://pakistani-revival.blogspot.com Ovais

The day science defines my purpose .. i will admit to ur theory … the day science can give why an answer .. rather than how alone…Recommend

Critical

@shahroz khurshd:
Please stop parroting Zakir Naik’s speeches to explain about Quranic Science..There are many scientific inaccuracies in every religious books,including Quran….If Quran really does possess so many scientific discoveries…How come most of the inventions and discoveries were made by non-muslims??
I know you will point out many medieval muslim scholars…But did they say anywhere that they discovered or invented after understanding a Quranic verse…..

Quran,Bible,Gita,Torah should be used by humans to gain personal enlightment…But please dont bring them into schools and science,….Because Science is totally opposite to what religion says….Religion makes us believe impossible things just because of our faith….whereas science make us doubt even the smallest things until we could prove them right……

A religious man can be a good scientist and a scientist can be religious….if he stops looking at the answers of science in their holy books…..Recommend

Critical

How religion and science work

Scientist 1 : I believe unicorn exists
Scientist 2 : Total Nonsense.I will not accept your statement until you can show me proof that unicorns exist

Religious person 1 : I believe unicorns exists
Religious person 2 : No way,you are making wild claims
Religious person 1 : I’ve my full faith in the existence of unicorns.I will reject my statement until you can show proof that unicorns doesnt exist

So this battle will go on for centuries until the religious bigots understand the fact they can’t force their hallucinations over verified factsRecommend

gp65

“Can masjids and laboratories co-exist?”

In present day they do in Indonesia, India, Turkey and US, – so question is not hypthetical. In the past there was a time that Islamic scientists were at cutting edge. So the issue to be discussed should not be whether Islam can co-exist with science (the underlying message from the heading) because it clearly can. Issue should be what will it take to make n mainstream Pakistanis accept scientific thought and reject illiterate mullahs and quacks like the water car kit guy.Recommend

BlackJack

A couple of points:
1. No one is saying that you cannot be religious and yet believe in scientific principles. What people are saying is that holy books are not science text books – they are meant to guide you to leading a more wholesome and spiritual existence.
2. What is worse is that everything seems to be ‘discovered’ retrospectively; scientists create something and there is someone out there to interpret some line in the book to say that this was already in the holy Quran. If so, why is it always found by the guys who don’t read the book?
3. ‘Muslim science’ is another oxymoron. If there is nothing called Jewish or Christian science, how can there be muslim science? The Arabs in the middle ages weren’t as choosy as you are today – picking up the number system from India, philosophy from the Greeks, geometry from the pre-Islam Egyptians; scientists like al-Haytham and scholars like A-Razi and Al-Khwarizmi built on these works with no reference to ‘discovering’ these truths in the Quran. Today’s Jews are no different – which is why they have won 20 per cent of all Nobel prizes till date.

Instead of continuing to take the ‘theka’ of the entire muslim world, why can’t you people try and give a sound education to all your citizens, Muslim, Hindu, Christian alike? They can then decide whether they want to find science in religion or vice-versa. Recommend

Clarus

absurd… this is between Dr Pervez and Agha Waqar, what masjid and religion has to do with the water kit?Recommend

Anthony Permal

If scientific ‘proofs’ are in religions scriptures, I’ll inform the Cancer foundation to get in touch with you guys so that you can show them the cure in your scripture.

This is foolish to claim that ibn e sena, ibn al haitham etc were scientists BECAUSE they were Muslims. Most of these scientists were from Zoroastrian ( Persia) that was recently converted to Islam by Arabs . We do not hear about Arab Muslim scientists. Religion has nothing to do with science or scientists.Recommend

khan

religion encourages reasoning to find the hidden realities of nature, and science helps in doing so science is a pathway to discover and understand religion. both are linked and cannot be separated.Recommend

Rationalist

How can science and religion co-exist when both claim to know the existence of reality? They can not co-exist because one claims to have “faith” and the other relies on hard scrutiny of evidence (science). If there is a tool (however limited and imperfect) to probe the existence and origin of the universe then it is only science that fits the bill. Religion actually tries to highjack the scientific turf by falsely claiming to know everything without evidence. Religion was perhaps humanity’s first attempt at understanding the universe and its place in it. With the advancement of scientifc understanding it is time to leave religious superstion behind and move on with science as a better guide.Recommend

shahroz khurshd

@ Mr.critical

(1) QUR’AN is not a book of science, it does not leads scientists to inventions, rather it has signs (which are discovered after years research).
Till now, not a single scientific proved sign that has been changed , if described in QUR’AN.
(you don’t want me to sound Dr. Zakir Naik, so there is Dr. Keith L. Moore, a christian embryologist, in his medical textbook “The Developing Human: Clinically Oriented Embryology” claimed that most of his discoveries were based on QUR’ANIC refrerences.

(2) I would like u to quote some scientific errors (u feel) in QUR’AN……Recommend

http://Www.google.com Saeed swabian

So this is why people trending more towards athiesm,Bollywood movie
‘OMG’,OH MY GOD may give you all help to s0me extent.Recommend

http://www.ahmadhammad.com Ahmad Hammad

@LoneliyliberalPK:
Before doubting if I know about Positivism or not and before guiding me any further in this regard, I’d request you to go through the Referenced articles and scholars. I hope, you too shall come up with the irrefutable references; and not with merely personal point of view.
A personal point can be countered with a personal point, however, a reference must not be countered that way…
Regards,Recommend

mind control

@Ahmad Hammad:

1.Well, I believe, we shouldn’t bracket all religions under the title of Religion. There are certain religions which are socially scientific. Others are psychologically scientific. However, Islam gave rise to Positivism; as positivism has been described by Weber

2.Before doubting if I know about Positivism or not and before guiding me any further in this regard, I’d request you to go through the Referenced articles and scholars.

I did not see any ‘Referenced Articles’ here. So I will restrain myself to ‘Scholars’. Positivism was most cogently propounded by Ausust Comte and Saint Simon.

Weber on the other hand was a great proponent of ‘Rationalism’ and is deen as a votary of ‘Antipositivism’.

Positivism was founded on the backs of staunch secularist humanists like Comte, and nothing that Weber may hypothesize could change that. That’s not a personal point, but a basic fact. A simple wikipedia entry here would be a sufficient reference.

Positivism is based on empirical evidence, which no religion in the world offers. It offers ideas about how the universe operates, some of which may turn out to be accurate. But as far as evidence goes, there is none.Recommend

http://lonepkliberal.wordpress.com Loneliberal PK

Ahmad Hammad,

Weber was an anti-positivist. Listening to his description and explanation of positivism, is like going to a rabbi to learn about Islam.Recommend

Sohail Ahmed

When ever we want to compare Religion with Science, we miss one important factor; Science is a subset of Religion. Science likes to stay within 4 dimensions and seeks other dimensions vaguely through guess work, whereas Religion vociferously leads us to higher dimensions and beyond. Muslims have failed to do their duty. Instead of proving the forward compatibility of Religion, they have shunned the hard work and wasted energies on warding off criticism and staying with the West. Dr. Hoodbhoy may be very intelligent, but in my eyes he has also ignored this important fact. Allah gave him the brain to ponder over the issue; he digresses from the Siraat-e-mustaqeem. May be one day he comes up with a good article, I will wait for that. Mutual exclusivity of Religious domains and Scientific domains (which in fact overlap) is being advocated by people who do not like to be reined. I see them having under-developed or faltering Amygdalas……… Allah say daro, bhai! Recommend

Historian 1

@ Shahroz Khurshd

So you are saying that a Christian ( on saudi payroll) understood Quran more than Islamic scholars who over a period of 14 centuries have studied and researched Quran in the light of Islamic wisdom. How funny.

My friend, Muslims were divided into sects even before compilation of Quran. As the Muslim scholars tried to understand Quran more they further divided into sects and today we have 72 Islamic sects. Isn’t it a miracle of Quran?

So, before looking for science in Quran, can you explain why Muslims have 72 sects when the Quran is divine and so very clear book.Recommend

Hamza A Khan

Sarah honestly, this is one the best blogs I’ve read on Tribune.

Beautifully written and I’m most impressed by the reasoned point you’ve made. It is difficult to write on any sensitive subject without a biased passion on one side, but you’ve done it beautifully.Recommend

Those saying Islam is simply opposite of critical thinking, questioning etc,
Then know that you have only learned that Mullah Islam. Recommend

Numan B

Okay here’s the thing, as mentioned millions of times before, science can change and evolve based on new information while religion can’t PERIOD. A word on Islam, we have had this delusional idea beaten into our collective psyche by outmoded textbooks and fervent Islamists that the Muslim civilizations of the middle ages were great because they were such pious Muslims, well a neutral study of history reveals that to be total bullshit, if we have to test the mettle of Islam being so great at uniting people, we only have to look at the four caliphs three of whom were murdered and need I remind you that those people are considered to be the staple of how a Muslim should behave. Christianity went through all of this during the supposed dark ages before and after the crusades but eventually after the renaissance and the enlightenment, they knew better, Muslims have this great historic example right before their eyes but we are learning this lesson the hard way, by making all of those mistakes first hand. What the author suggests can be reworded simply: stop taking your religion so seriously, nobody is stopping you from praying five times a day but don’t ring my doorbell to ask me to join you, same goes for the liberals, Live and Let Live. Recommend

Historian 1

There is no Science in Quran,

Humans are made of clay – not true
earth is flat – not true
sun and moon follow each other – not true
sun sets in muddy water – not true
mountains are nails in the earth – not true
stars are bulbs in the roof above the earth – not true

Also, Zakir Naik and others have recently changed the meanings of Quranic words to match scientific discoveries. these meanings are never found in the 14 centuries of Quranic translations. Zakir Naik is not allowed to enter Pakistan due to his beliefs.Recommend

Sane

Science…… what is today originates from Muslim scientists’ research and vision. All those Muslim scientists were practicing Muslims as well. Yes, they used to go Masjid and Laboratory both. Hoodbhoy or any one says that Masjid and Laboratory can’t co-exist. This is lame and based on ill-knowledge.Recommend

kanwal

i guess when Hoodbhoy says that they cant co-exist, he means that if we begin to take dictation from religion, we can not keep an open mind essential for doing good science. The Jaber bin Hayyans of Muslim socciety did beleive in “Ijtehad”. The IJT-based loosers’ religiosity thats spreading in the Pakistani academia (mostly because they ARE loosers), do not most probably understand even the urdu meaning of Ijtehad, let alone the philosophy. This is very dangerous to scientific approach. And this is the kind that cant coexist with science at all. Recommend

http://www.ahmadhammad.com Ahmad Hammad

@Loneliberal PK: Thanks for the correction. It was Comte. However, the substance of the argument remains unchanged at least in here. Societies evolve through 3 stages: Theological, Metaphyical and Positivist, said Comte.

With the change of the name of the thinker (Comte in place of Weber), kindly go thorough my lines written earlier.

I quote:
“Well, I believe, we shouldn’t bracket all religions under the title of Religion. There are certain religions which are socially scientific. Others are psychologically scientific. However, Islam gave rise to Positivism; as positivism has been described by Weber.

To Iqbal, the era of Science starts in its truest sense from the revelation of the Quran. You may disagree, however, there are historical evidences of this claim. Iqbal in his Reconstruction has provided such evidences with confidence……” Unquote.

Thanks for the correction of the name. The name just got slipped off my memory. Since it’s a blog only, we generally don’t review it for the verification of such references. Though it is a wrong practice. I should have confirmed the name first. Thanks n Apologies. :)Recommend

Hella

If one is a true Muslim, then science is not important. That is the reason no Muslim nation stands anywhere in the world of science. One hardly hears of any contributions to science by Muslim nations. In fact Pakistan hounded out Dr.Abdus Salam, as there is no place for scientists in Muslim countries.Recommend

Rex Minor

Could ET censor board advise why my comments on science and religion are not being shown?Are foreigner not allowed to share their knowledge on science and religion with Pakistani bloggers?

Islam’s unique strength was in inviting people to study, think, examine, not accept anything on blind belief. That is the reason why Allama Iqbal said that science – positivist science – really began with Islam. He was right about that. Everything that Islam has claimed has turned out to be true. Scientists come and go, but the Holy Quran, which is the basis of Islamic free thought and exploration of the world, lives forever.Recommend

Mandeep Vaid

Yes mosqes and sciences can co-exist,

when all natural scientists are talabani ET editors, who weigh every rational comment with

‘Could ET censor board advise why my comments on science and religion are not being shown? Are foreigner not allowed to share their knowledge on science and religion with Pakistani bloggers?’

Extremely unfair. Germany’s contribution to modern science and technology is well known. What is less understood and much less appreciated is that Germans also contributed (at least tried) to champion the cause of a ‘supreme race’; which in layman’s term is ‘We are the chosen one’, hence ‘We are the best’. And that blends seamlessly with the concept of ‘Best and ultimate’ religion. Having a history of troubled relation with Jews, they qualify to be the natural ally of the people holding ‘perpetual victim’ card.
That makes every German (Full, half or quarter) qualified to contribute in any discussion on science and religion. Recommend

gp65

@Numan B: “Okay here’s the thing, as mentioned millions of times before, science can change and evolve based on new information while religion can’t PERIOD.”

This is not true about ALL religions though it maybe true about some.Recommend

Shibl

How can one even begin to imagine that science and religion can co-exist. Sure, you can choose to leave your scientific observations and empirical evidence in the lab and believe in religion outside the lab; but in that case what kind of scientist are you? What kind of religious beliefs do you have that are standing tall in the face of evidence that you have compiled. Something definitely has to give. These two are mirror opposites of one another and therefore one must chose.
Hint: Choose science.Recommend

Rex Minor

Debal,
Your commonts are not abnormal since they reflect the propaganda element of the half German anglo saxons!
Let me try again to explain without stepping on the toes of others. All knowledge emanates from scriptures and is imbedded in the three Ibrahimic religions, Islam being the last one for the mankind which is the reformed version of the Bible.
There was a fusion and the bang and the world was created and this is in the scriptures, today all who specialise in Physics are involved in CERN to learn more of the experience which is necessary to discover the future that we already know but also to discover more of the past whih is no longer with us.
Oxford, Cambridge and Harvard were all Madrassas established to teach theology and so were the Islamic madrassas in the Islamic world to teach Quraan and in arabic language, the best of best The scriptures are coded and to decode there are prerequisites and all of them are explained therein.

All three institutions in the west were later upgraded with additional subjects of Mathematics and science. And before this occured it was the jewish and the muslim scholars who taught in the oldest European Uiversities including Monpelier(France) and Bologna(Italy).

Science is not static, as Amber states and human search for knowledge has not ended nor have humans been able to utilize more than average 18 % of the potental of their brain. Let me remind that what the Prophet of God Mohammad(pbuh) said after retur from his divine and historic visit to Heaven in an unmeasurable time was explained by Einstein after thousands of years in the theory of relativity.
Now you should decide the relationship of Religion with Science?

This war between Religion and Science is an asymmetrical one.
There is no mutually ‘accepted rule of engagement’.
While ‘science’ carries the ‘burden of proof’ almost by definition; ‘religion’ is free from any such restriction. It is probably the cruelest rumour that has been spread down the ages and played over and over with such impunity that even god would envy.
I haven’t yet come across a place of worship without a lightening rod on the top of it, and that’s lack of confidence. Finally;
“The world holds two classes of men – intelligent men without religion, and religious men without intelligence.”
– Abu al Ala al-Ma’arri (973 – 1058)Recommend

Rex Minor

Cynical,

We can even go back to Neanathaler and come over to the time of how and why which was the beginning of Padagogy/learning. This is how the humans developmant took a form and started to speak and later write and cook and eat and made the land for farming and so on. The cradle of civilisation is in the middle east as well as the land fwhere Prophets of God were born..

Yes, there is a rule of engagement and for thousands of years has been ignored. Learn to read scriptures( there is a certain concern with Bible which was translated in Latin and amended), but not Quraan which is in arabic and requires the knowledge of the language and familiarity with arab culture. There cannot be accuracy in translations from one language to another, because of the disparity between the two languages. Anyone who wants to understand Hegel speculative logic, must first have the proficiency in German language says Hegel.

Science does not have the burden of proof, but clinical studies become easier for those who have the prior kowledge from the scriptures. Since the time f Ibn e Batutta non arab muslim Nations have continued to learn Quraan, to their disadvantage, from the translations though saying their prayers in arabic. Is it the fault of the religion or science?

I would like to get in touch with you. Do you write? If you do, do share your website / email / blog whatever. Recommend

Critical

@Rex Minor:
Wow,Rex Minor
I knew it was a matter of time you would bring the topic that the science from Quran wasnt extracted because one needs proper knowledge of Arabic language to understand it..

Last time,I posed the same question,which I’m repeating now..
Arabic language never had a threat of extinction like Latin,Hebrew etc.There are 2 billion muslims in the world,out of which around 30% of read,write and speak Arabic…There might be atleast 1000 PhDs in Arabic and Islamic Science currently in this world…Also,rich countries like Saudi Arabia would love to sponsor research to anyone who could extract knowledge from Quran and they’re doing it so.

But you want to say that None of them ever could extract the science from Quran??? Please dont start with Goethe,Emmanuel Kant etc..When a full knowledge of German could help us understand them..How come no Arab could understand the science in Quran??

“All knowledge emanates from scriptures and is imbedded in the three Ibrahimic religions, “

Can you please tell me which verse explains Theory of Relativity which was proposed by a Jewish born atheist.What about the vaccine for polio? Taxonomy of plants,Origin of universe(not that god made in 7 days),Celestial bodies???

If knowledge originated from Abrahmic scriptures.How come Sumerians,Indians,Chinese and Japanese were making important discoveries and inventions even before Abraham originated.Recommend

Insaan

@Saima: “Religion may be unquestionable faith but it is not stupid……or irrational, like a car run by water”

What you think about Muslims being punished in the grave after death or 72 virgins for martyrs?Recommend

Insaan

@shahroz khurshd: QUR’AN is not a book of science, it does not leads scientists to inventions, rather it has signs (which are discovered after years research).

All these people who are discovering scientific things in Quran are non-Muslims. Muslims did not discover anything for 1400 years ago. Embryo never looks like a clot or leech, if that is the science you are talking about. Recommend

Rex Minor

Critical,

The one think I have not learnt is to make people understand what they are not meant to uderstand. is what the Creator knows about humans.

All you statements are more or less are accurate. But please do not casualy cherry pick from my statements. We can all play the role of the devil’s advocate but this is not productive. I have provied the ino without any fee or personal interest, my motivation is to shar th knwledg which is religion +science based. If you want to drive a Porsche, then you must read and follow the instructions as stipulated by the constructor of Porsche Engine. You must learn the arabic language to understand the quraan suras, there is no short cut. You canot read or understand the 60,000 verses in Firdausi Shahnameh if you are not familiar with the persian language.

Remember, on average only 18% of the potential of human brain is in use today. Today you can go into MRT and have your brain scanned in action from the questions the Brain specialists ask and he could even tell you the part which does not respond. Dr Houdhoboy can do the same and does not question things which one does not understand.

how come Einstein stated what others did not and what the Prophet of Go(pbuh) arrated thousands of years ago is a separate subject ot for ET. Every mdical specialist should know if he has used the pigs for clinical studies that the anatomy of pigs is similar to humans and therefore the infected pig when eaten can instantly transfer the infection to human and cause death. This is ot the case in other animals. Hence Jews, christians and muslims are advised not to eat pig meat.

sorry, I do not have my own home page nor do I have the time to communicate with people. I
appeared on ET as I was ordered , just to be helpful to those muslims who in my view could use my tips to be able to understand their religion with clarity,

The scriptures contain the complete knowlege of the universe and it is upto the scientists to explain how and why the hitherto uknown occurs, and this with the knowledge of science and medicine as well as clinical trials. The world scientists have more or less shied away from the religion and this was a mistake and the main causual factor for the human regression. Now the scientists are embarked on the path of the religion tounravel the mystery of the big bang when theuniverse came into being and this is necessary today more than yeah, since the makind is going in the directon of the disorder faster than before from the order of the past.

@Rex Minor: You said: ” infected pig when eaten can instantly transfer the infection to human and cause death. This is ot the case in other animals. Hence Jews, christians and muslims are advised not to eat pig meat”.

Please do not distort science in the name of sharing your knowledge of it. Your above statement does not make sense at all. Any animal which is infected when eaten can cause infection and death to humans. And non infected pork is eaten everywhere in Europe without any major ill effects on health when compared to other forms of meat such as Beef.Recommend

Aviator

Yes science and religion CAN co-exist. Look at the period of Moorish rule in Andalucia, where science, arts, mathematics, engineering, architecture on the one hand, and Islam on the other, not only co-existed but inspired each other to produce a vibrant period of learning and discovery, most of which became the foundations for Western European science.Recommend

Rex Minor

Elementary,
My statement did not make sese to you because you have not the knowledge of medical science nor have you carried out clinical trials on pigs, which is a norm for research work.

Let me try to add some more and see if it makes sense to you. How many years research one needs to establish that fasting is healthy and if carried out even for a period of two weeks can make the cancer cells loose orientation and die. During fasting no solid food is alowed but vegetable soup and water consumption is allowed. This was experimented in 2012.

You want someting more which makes sense. How much time one should need to establish that if the cancer cells are denied the food they live on, they would die? And how much time one needs to establish the ingredients which the cancer cells need to live on?

@Rex Minor:
Its really strange that I’ve posted many replies to you but none of them are being published…Maybe u’re the Mod who zaps my comment :)

Once again,regarding the fasting…You should know that fasting pre-dates 7th century AD….Many Hindus fast and they still do…Its also mentioned in Ayurveda as a method of detoxifying and rejuvenating your body…

Besides,even in Arabia,Prophet Mohammed’s Qurayish tribe used to fast and Prophet followed that custom to muslims too…

Also,I think the islamic fasting is different from what you’ve written..Ramadan fasting involves not even drinking water from dawn to dusk and then having food..The fasting method you’ve said is followed by Hindus where they eat only liquid food and fruits….Recommend

Rex Minor

@Critical:

I fully agree with your comments and have confirmed it with detailed comments. It is upto ET moerates if and when they release it.

Religion and science can co-exist but depends on which religion. Abrahamic religions do not encourage thinking out of the box but eastern religions allow introspection and enquiry.Recommend

Rex Minor

Critical,

You have got the message, but not yet the detailed reply which probably in night post which is not read by the over worked moderator. Now let me explain, why the subject of science compatibility with relgion every now and the comes into question? There were times that people of science came into conflict with the catholic institution of the Pope!

Islam has no conflict with science per say, Dr Houdobhoy has a personal conflict with his religion since he does not believe in God’s interventio in the world affairs.

Science and religion can co-exists in a secular or no religion government. Todays science and evidence does not favour any religion as they are base on evidence,observation and repeatable tests. Many religious believes are against science.

Modern muslims can accept these facts and reconcile religion with them. In a secular society both can co-exist but they should not get into each others way which is only possible if controlling power is secular system as we see in the west.Recommend

It makes me laugh reading all the comments declaring science as rational, while religion as irrational/illogical (and vice versa). Its useless to even try and argue against such non-objective assertions.Recommend

Noor

Yes both can co-exist, if the religion has such vast vision as Islam has.
Quran doesn’t limit the thinking process.

The convent schools besides churches were built as a follow up to Islamic Madrassa system, where every subject like, science, astronomy, etc was taught.
This was the background that led Muslims(500 years ago) to provide basis of so many branches of knowledge, that world owes to them.Recommend

ashfaq

@Hina Khan:
sorry you should study religion you can question whats wrong in the religion. before making comment you should question religion fron a good real religion scholar not in public. do not go to public till you got no answer from religious scholar.Recommend

ashfaq

@Abdul Basit:
Mr i think you do not know much about religion. you should comment then if you did not get the answer about the religion from a good real religious scholar. you are blindly following people such as hoodbhoy i know him much than you. you should watch videos of scholars like zakir naik, diddat, etc .
also read a book by a french scientist brocellori (name could be a bit wrong) , i think if you read with out prejudice thinking you will got so many answers.Recommend

ashfaq

@p r sharma:
no you are totally wrong . may be questioning religion be frobidden in your religion. you can always ask question about islam. but making statements with out knowing islam is not the right thing.
you can read a book on islam and science by Maurice Bucaille (french scientist) hope then your mind will be clear or can ask question about islam from a real islamic scholar like zakir naik, ahmad deedat etc or watch videos on yoouytube

Mr i think you do not know much about religion. you should comment then if you did not get the answer about the religion from a good real religious scholar. you are blindly following people such as hoodbhoy i know him much than you. you should watch videos of scholars like zakir naik, diddat, etc .
also read a book by a french scientist brocellori (name could be a bit wrong) , i think if you read with out prejudice thinking you will got so many answers.Recommend

ashfaq

@Anthony Permal:
please read a book by a french scientist Maurice Bucaille . may be in your religion you have doubt but if you read islam. you will definitley find the right way.
or watch dr zakir naik videosRecommend